Well, I suppose, but she sounded nutty about it considering the very real dangers and effects being felt now. It did sound like she was saying there is little danger to the whole event. Ann can be a bit kooky and emotional at times.
“It did sound like she was saying there is little danger to the whole event.”
Yeah, that’s pretty much the case.
These anti-nuke maniacs keep calling Three-Mile Island a “disaster,” even though no one was killed and there was no significant release of radioactive material.
Chernobyl was a disaster. That disaster was the direct result of leftist thought. If Satan hadn’t whispered in Karl Marx’s ear, it never would have happened.
No plant in the West is as poorly designed, shoddily constructed, or incompetently operated as Chernobyl. (Which goes double for Japan. I mean, a 9.0 earthquake and the reactors were fine, until a tsunami knocked the aux diesels off line? Now *that’s* some engineering.)
Who and what it was directed at were those who get hysterical over the slightest elevation in background radiation. She NEVER suggested that basking in the glow of an exposed nuclear reactor core was a good and healthy thing to do.
As others pointed out this was not her "opinion" but was citing recognized scientific research about slightly elevated radiation levels not be harmful and possibly beneficial to humans. I feel she did a great service in helping some people understand that all radiation exposure is not the same. At least those not so hysterical.
It's not Ann that needs to be spanked [Although if someone must do it, I will volunteer for that duty] but it is those who misrepresent what she said.